The following letter was written by Samuel Taylor, Jr. (1797-1875) of North Fairfield, Somerset county, Maine. Samuel was married to Lydia Bowerman (1799-1877). Samuel wrote the letter to his friend, Nathaniel C. Crenshaw (1816-1888) of Hanover county, Virginia. Both families were Quakers who were outspoken opponents of slavery and the mistreatment and abuse of Indians. In 1837, Nathaniel Crenshaw was even indicted in Virginia for having circulated literary material produced by the Quakers. The particular Virginia Law, passed in 1836, that Crenshaw was accused of violating was the following:

“Whereas attempts have been recently made by certain abolition or anti-slavery societies, and evil-disposed persons residing in some of the non-slaveholding states, to interfere with the relations existing between master and slave in this state, and to excite in our coloured population a spirit of insubordination, rebellion, and insurrection, by distributing among them, through the agency of the United States mail and other means, certain incendiary books, pamphlets, or other writings of inflammatory and mischievous character and tendency: For remedy whereof, and to provide against the dangers thence arising….be it enacted…that any member of an abolition or anti-slavery society who shall come into this state, and shall here maintain, by speaking or writing, that the owners of slaves have no property in the same, or advocate or advise the abolition of slavery, shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof, be fined in a sum of not less than fifty dollars nor more than 200 dollars and shall suffer a term of imprisonment of not less than six months nor more than three years, at the discretion of a jury.”

Samuel’s letter does not allude in any way to slavery but focuses on the trafficking of whiskey among the Indian tribes.

Transcription

North Fairfield
23rd on 11 Mo. 1846

Dear Friend,

Thy favor of the 28th ultimo reached me sometime since but owing to my other engagements and my absence from home, it has not been convenient for me to answer it until now. In answer to thy 1st enquiry, “by whom are spiritous liquors introduced among the Indians, ” I will return for answer that they are introduced by almost all persons who have the slightest intercourse with them. The General Government has in nearly every Tribe either an Agent or a Sub Agent who has power to license persons to trade with the Indians in certain specified articles such as com. blankets, provisions of all kinds, clothing, guns and ammunition, but, it is not to be supposed that these reckless and abandoned men stop here. No! We have every reason to think that whiskey constitutes one of the main articles which is bartered off to the poor Indians for their furs, their moneys which are paid to them by Government, their horses, their guns, their provisions, and in fact, their everything of value.

And then there is another class of men who locate themselves all along on the frontier to have their whiskey shop just within the Territory of Iowa, Missouri and Arkansas which border upon the Indians lands. I think that I may satisfactorily say that a more wicked and licentious set of men cannot be found in any part of our vast dominion. The quantity of spiritous liquors sold by these creatures to the poor ignorant Indians is enormous. We are told by a person conversant with the subject that the increased sales of whiskey to a single tribe of Indians numbering about 2,000 souls was 200 barrels in one year more than the preceding year.

And if there is any reliance to be placed upon men who have the best means of knowing the fact, the Agents of the American Fur Company come in for a pretty large share of the profits of this iniquitous traffic. And then again the Indians have such a strong thirst for intoxicating drinks that they will make any sacrifice or forego any comfort to obtain it. We are audibly informed by a person who has resided amongst the Potawatomi for many years that he was an eye witness to an Indian giving a pretty good horse in exchange for as much rum as he could hold in his mouth and swallow at a draught. Thou will not by this time be at a loss to know where and how the Indians get the whiskey.

The 2nd question I think is, “And what is the best method of putting a stop to such introduction.” This I conceive to be much the most difficult part to answer. I have for years been revolving this question in my own mind and with every plan that suggests itself to my mind, there are difficulties in the way. But without enumerating many of the plans that I have had in view, I will say that in my opinion, we shall find that more good would arise to the Indians that if instead of their receiving so large a portion of their annuities at one time, and this too in money, if the Government was to have a responsible Agent who should be paid by the Government, and accountable to the Government, to whom should be consigned such goods as the Indians stood in need of, and none others, whose duty it should be to deal out to the Indians severally and from time to time as their needs might be such goods and provisions as should be consigned to him, receiving from the Indians no profit on these or any other goods. And that little or no money should be paid the Indians for it is a notorious fact that not one Indian in every 100 retains one dollar for the span of 4 days after he receives it from the Agent. It passes almost immediately into the hands of the fur trader, the licensed trader, or the whiskey trader, and by the way, they are all whiskey dealers. And again I would have the government use much more efficient means to elevate the moral condition of the Indians and especially the females that they might be taught to know their rights.

It is unquestionably the policy of those whiskey sellers and fur traders to keep the poor creatures as ignorant as possible that they may the more readily plunder them of their last dollars and we shall find that any attempt to raise their moral condition and to break them off from the use of intoxicating drinks will be met with strong opposition by those we have been wont for years to rub out all all that is good.

I think the Committee of Baltimore…to obtain some numbers of our Report, they might find it something that might be of use in aiding them in their labors with the General Government. They may be had in New York and if I recollect rightly, every member of Congress was furnished with one 3 years ago.

I am very glad that you [ ] have found it their place to engage in the good work of attempting to break some of the heavy chains that bind down the poor natives of the forest. You have my sincere wishes for your success…Do give my love to thy son John and to his dear Rachel and to all thy household and tell John his letter was ver acceptable. I remain thy friend, — Samuel Taylor